Superman (casting, rumors, pix till release)

New interview where he talks some about Superman. I'm definitely encouraged to hear that he wants a more "realistic" feel for this movie, and that it apparently won't just be in his usual, super-stylized style.

And he also plans to do a lot more location work than he's done in the past, so it won't just be another all-green screen thing either.

Click to expand...

Yes, I was very reassured to read that. A fanciful concept like Superman works best cinematically if approached with verisimilitude. That's what Richard Donner did, and it worked well for him.

Frankly I don't mind if he continues to bring his stylish flair to the action scenes; I just don't want every OTHER freakin scene in the movie to be posed and stylized beyond belief as well (which for me was the main problem with Watchmen).

Click to expand...

Actually I wouldn't like that. I'd prefer the action to be handled naturalistically too. We've already seen plenty of Matrix-style slo-mo and Snyder-style speed ramping in Smallville's action sequences, and though there have been occasional moments when it's reached the level of artistry, for the most part it's long since become a cliche.

And I'd still love to see a flying action scene in a Superman movie executed practically with skydiving stuntmen, rather than with greenscreen/wires or digital characters. That's something I've always wanted to see, and the closest there's ever been was an episode of The Greatest American Hero where you could blatantly see the rip cord and the parachute pouch -- but it was still exciting, and if they could do it on a TV budget, there's no reason a feature film couldn't pull it off.

And I'd still love to see a flying action scene in a Superman movie executed practically with skydiving stuntmen, rather than with greenscreen/wires or digital characters. That's something I've always wanted to see, and the closest there's ever been was an episode of The Greatest American Hero where you could blatantly see the rip cord and the parachute pouch -- but it was still exciting, and if they could do it on a TV budget, there's no reason a feature film couldn't pull it off.

Click to expand...

I thought it was cool to see them try that (it was certainly better than putting the guy on top of a pickup truck, which they did later), but personally I thought that scene in GAH proved how the "real thing" doesn't look nearly as good as we imagine it. The way everything ripples violently in the wind like that, and the way the person's face gets all stretched and contorted, just doesn't really go with the graceful image I have of Superman.

I DID think the more toned-down version of the real thing used in SR (particularly during the plane rescue) worked really well though. I'd love to see Snyder follow SR's lead on that.

Super-cheeks and super-lips won't flap and wave as much as a mortal human's, and super-eyes have no need to squint against the wind. How would you deal with the instinctive tendency to squint for eye protection, against actual wind like that?

However, super-hair might get blown back more or less exactly like a mortal's would, and the forehead curl might really disappear, from being blown back, until he slows down or lands.

She'd be a great Lois and she has the right age, I always preferred Lois to be older than Clark, she's supposed to be an experienced reporter with lots of connections, the last thing I want is a chick who looks like she's straight out of college.

Super-cheeks and super-lips won't flap and wave as much as a mortal human's, and super-eyes have no need to squint against the wind. How would you deal with the instinctive tendency to squint for eye protection, against actual wind like that?

However, super-hair might get blown back more or less exactly like a mortal's would, and the forehead curl might really disappear, from being blown back, until he slows down or lands.

Click to expand...

I should amend my remarks about squinting to say that he shouldn't be squinting as much as a mortal. What I meant was, at speeds up to terminal velocity of a skydiver, Superman should have no need to squint.

I don't expect the cape to flap at all at supersonic speeds, so I implicitly assumed a skydiver would only be used to film scenes when he was going, say, only a few hundred mph, in any case.

She'd be a great Lois and she has the right age, I always preferred Lois to be older than Clark, she's supposed to be an experienced reporter with lots of connections, the last thing I want is a chick who looks like she's straight out of college.

Click to expand...

Yeah that's why I always thought Kidder's Lois was so underrated. She was cute (in the first movie, at least) but still felt like the kind of tough, hard-charging, seen-it-all reporter you'd really find working for a major newspaper back then.

Unlike a lot of fans, I don't need Lois to be some hot supermodel type. Although I admit... Rachel McAdams is so freakin adorable I would gladly make an exception for her.

No, a mortal gets bullet holes. SFX has to sell the idea that bullets are bouncing off Superman. Bullets just don't bounce off a mortal person. Not me, anyway.

And then, either you choose to make dimples on his body, or make the bullets ricochet as if off steel. Maybe there is a third way. But he is the Man of Steel right?

As a baseline, I didn't like the way Hulk looked, when he was getting shot, in either film, because I didn't buy that bullets were going to make all those little dimples on the Hulk. They made Hulk look too weak. In the comics, I seem to recall seeing bullets ricocheting off Hulk as if off concrete, and Hulk's skin looking as hard as the proverbial rock. I think an American audience especially would understand a ricochet, by visual and sound FX, and it might actually be both very amusing and entertaining, if executed properly, at least coming off the Hulk.

But anyway, OK. If you want to put some dimples on Superman when he's getting shot, which is really a different story altogether than the Hulk, then that's fine, I guess. But whatever you do, it's already different from a mortal person.

If I understand your point, I think we both actually agree that having super-skin really would have implications for how Clark Kent looks in ordinary human settings. For example, if he leans over the corner of a desk, then the corner won't sink into his tummy at all, not even a millimeter. That is, unless he deforms his super-tummy using his super-will .

I thought it was cool to see them try that (it was certainly better than putting the guy on top of a pickup truck, which they did later), but personally I thought that scene in GAH proved how the "real thing" doesn't look nearly as good as we imagine it. The way everything ripples violently in the wind like that, and the way the person's face gets all stretched and contorted, just doesn't really go with the graceful image I have of Superman.

Click to expand...

Well, of course the closeups of the actors' faces would be shot in the studio, since obviously it would be stunt performers doing the skydiving, not the actors themselves. That's the way it's routinely done in James Bond films and the like, so I assumed that went without saying. But having it be actual skydivers in the more distant shots would really help give a sense of realism and dynamism to the scenes that greenscreen work just couldn't achieve.

No, a mortal gets bullet holes. SFX has to sell the idea that bullets are bouncing off Superman. Bullets just don't bounce off a mortal person. Not me, anyway.

Click to expand...

When something hits me in the chest unless it pierces me it either knocks me over, falls to the ground or bounces off. When wind hits me in the face, my face moves. When I make an expression, my face moves. When wind blows through my hair, my hair moves.

All of those things happen to Superman too, or else he doesn't look like a human being but a piece of statuary. The notion that a high-speed stream of air wouldn't distort his features is inconsistent with the idea that his hair would move in the wind.

Everything is still speculation at this point. I hate repeating myself but there's really no point in discussing casting right now because there probably won't be any news until after "Sucker Punch" press junkets are done. I would start to expect to hear more stuff in a week or so.

If they're using "Birthright" or "Secret Origin" as the source material for this movie and the story structure of "Batman Begins" as inspiration as Zack has stated then it would be logical to assume that Lex will appear in the movie but not be prominent. The grown up version of Luthor isn't featured in those two stories until the second half of each book. I would estimate that if Luthor is in the movie we won't see him until the climax...